Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Forfeiture of seized goods

Legal area

Court

4 Feb 2026

MOHD FADZLI BIN SALEH

Citation

AB-83-503-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AB-83-503-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused had control and knowledge of the seized cigarettes because it did not exclude access by other persons with proprietary interest in the premises; investigative failures (not interviewing title holders or neighbours, no on‑site enquiries) created reasonable doubt, requiring discharge of accused at end of prosecution case.
24 Nov 2025

DAUD BIN ABDULLAH SANI

Citation

AB-83-21-01/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AB-83-21-01/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Having proven that the seized cigarettes were prohibited imports and that the defendant, as lawful tenant present and in control of the single‑access premises, had possession and knowledge (via the rebuttable presumption under s135(2)), and because the defendant failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities, the prosecution proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the defendant is guilty under s135(1)(d) Customs Act 1967.
17 Dec 2020

PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya Chin Wah Seng

Citation

JA-83-4941-10/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

JA-83-4941-10/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Magistrate accepted that offences were not 'serious' under s52B, that mandatory imprisonment language in Customs Act did not preclude exercise of discretion under s294, and on balance of public interest, offender's first‑time status, low value of goods and guilty plea imposed a two‑year bond with RM3,000 surety for the Customs charge and a RM2,000 fine (or 2 months' imprisonment if unpaid) for the Excise charge.

Malaysia Case Law

MOHD FADZLI BIN SALEH

DAUD BIN ABDULLAH SANI

PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya Chin Wah Seng